The F may be back

[Guest crandamaniac]

from OO

 

The F is back.  Kind of.

 

On Wednesday, a British court over-turned a previous ruling that forced WWE and THQ to pull old videogames -- ones that had the old WWF scratch logo embedded -- off shelves.  The World Wildlife Fund obtained the original ruling just prior to the Christmas shopping season, and without any WWE representation present (as the Fund targetted only THQ in that case).

 

WWE intervened in the appeal process, and won the right to once again distribute the old games.  As part of the ruling, the court expressly stated that the Fund had not shown that WWE's selling of the games caused no demonstrable damage to the Fund, and also (listen closely now) that the Fund could not claim exclusive rights to the initials "WWF."

 

Now, I've only seen the press releases, and not the actual ruling made by the courts, but that last bit sounds promising...  we may not ever see the "Wheeeee!" go back to operating as the "Whiff", but I would think this ruling opens the doors for today's WWE to use/release old footage that did include the WWF name/logos.

 

That would be nice.  The end of the blurring, the end of the revisionist history... yeah, I'd take that as a compromise at this point.  To me, if it happened before May 2002, it happened in the WWF, and that's always how I reference it when I talk or write about it.  It'd be nice for today's WWE to have the same freedom.

 

Press releases also included mentions of an attempt by the Fund to "extort" $90 million from WWE last year, and later attempts to have WWE declared in contempt of court for revealing the Fund's demands.  The attack on THQ was purportedly in response to WWE's refusal to pay the $90 million.

 

The Fund is also on the hook for all of WWE's court costs related to this appeal, upwards of $100,000, which, as a quote from Linda McMahon notes, will come out of monies collected by the Fund from unwitting donors who thought they were helping the poor pandas.

 

And yes, I am intentionally milking this particular bullet point for a few extra paragraphs with unnecessary backstory.  Because if I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: any excuse to mock the pretentious, obnoxious, no-sense-of-perspective-having pricks at the World Wildlife Fund is a good one.

 

This sounds like pretty good news to me. Think about it, if this applies to video games, then hopefully it'll pertain to any videos with the scratch logo on it. Maybe we can finally get rid of the blurs! And by the way, how exactly is the logo on a turnbuckle or anything else damaging to the World Wildlife Fund?

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

I think it just means that the Fund can't stop the WWE from continuing the sale of games that were made before the name change.

[Guest edge-o-matic]

Sweet.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

This judgement only pertains to *previously* sold videogames with the scratch logo (No Mercy, for example). It was (probably) made with the notion that "If the WWFund didn't object before, they shouldn't now and that it is unreasonable for the WWE to incur a loss of revenue because of it".

 

For any *future* and *current* sales, the Scratch logo must be changed as deemed in the original judgement. This by no means says that the WWE can get the F back, it just means it doesn't have to get the F out of all the old videogames still on sale.

[Guest El Satanico]

And by the way, how exactly is the logo on a turnbuckle or anything else damaging to the World Wildlife Fund?

It wouldn't, but the logo being on the ring or in other places that wouldn't earn a profit wasn't the problem, so it doesn't matter.

 

I may be mistaken, but I believe the problem was mainly the web site and earning profits with the logo overseas.